Summarization of Antonin Scalia-God's Justice and Ours
Final-Summarization of Antonin Scalia’s Essay “God’s Justice and Ours”
Antonin Scalia opens up his introduction stating he wants to make clear that his moral views on capital punishment do not have persuasion on how his referendums in capital cases that come to the Supreme Court. Furthermore, Antonin Scalia is not daunted to state his views on church-state issues and has consistently shown he has scant use for the First Amendment’s separation of church and state. In an essay he writes titled, “God’s Justice and Ours,” Scalia explains why he is compelled to support the death penalty despite his church’s opposition to the practice. Moreover, he explains his worldview about how a government acquires moral authority and why the nation-state can permissibly eradicate its own citizens. He concludes that government is an instrument of God and an institution that operates with “divine authority behind” it. In addition, he goes on to write that people of faith should fight “as effectively as possible” any effort to “obscure” our government’s religious underpinnings. However, the complication is that Scalia is one-ninth of this country's highest judicial body. He has unique responsibilities that demand strict neutrality and objectivity. While Scalia can be credulous on whatever he wants about issues of faith, he may not practice religion as the basis for judicial rulings. In short, he avowed on the Bible to uphold the Constitution, not the other way around. In conclusion, Scalia has relinquished any pretense about keeping a healthy distance between the institutions of religion and government. He has consciously and intentionally turned his back on the framework set up by the Founding Fathers, which created a secular government based on a secular Constitution adopted by "we the people." Our laws were not created to enforce a divine authority, however according to the Constitution, to "form a more perfect union.
Antonin Scalia opens up his introduction stating he wants to make clear that his moral views on capital punishment do not have persuasion on how his referendums in capital cases that come to the Supreme Court. Furthermore, Antonin Scalia is not daunted to state his views on church-state issues and has consistently shown he has scant use for the First Amendment’s separation of church and state. In an essay he writes titled, “God’s Justice and Ours,” Scalia explains why he is compelled to support the death penalty despite his church’s opposition to the practice. Moreover, he explains his worldview about how a government acquires moral authority and why the nation-state can permissibly eradicate its own citizens. He concludes that government is an instrument of God and an institution that operates with “divine authority behind” it. In addition, he goes on to write that people of faith should fight “as effectively as possible” any effort to “obscure” our government’s religious underpinnings. However, the complication is that Scalia is one-ninth of this country's highest judicial body. He has unique responsibilities that demand strict neutrality and objectivity. While Scalia can be credulous on whatever he wants about issues of faith, he may not practice religion as the basis for judicial rulings. In short, he avowed on the Bible to uphold the Constitution, not the other way around. In conclusion, Scalia has relinquished any pretense about keeping a healthy distance between the institutions of religion and government. He has consciously and intentionally turned his back on the framework set up by the Founding Fathers, which created a secular government based on a secular Constitution adopted by "we the people." Our laws were not created to enforce a divine authority, however according to the Constitution, to "form a more perfect union.